UI Professors Urge Supreme Court to See Beyond Procedure in Bahlil Dissertation Case

The Chair of the University of Indonesia Faculty of Medicine (FKUI) Board of Professors, Teddy Prasetyono, has requested the Supreme Court not to confine its review to administrative aspects in the cassation case concerning the annulment of ethical sanctions against the dissertation promoters of Energy and Mineral Resources Minister Bahlil Lahadalia. He argued that academic ethics violations must be regarded as serious matters with ramifications that can corrupt the world of science. According to Teddy, ethical violations in academia have an impact no less serious than corruption, as they can corrupt the process of knowledge production that forms the foundation of societal progress. “If we as citizens look at corruption, the one who suffers from corruption is the entire nation. The academic world faces a similar temptation,” Teddy stated during a press conference for the Amicus Curiae at the UI Salemba campus in Central Jakarta on Thursday, 4 June 2026. He noted that academics are required to produce scientific works and new knowledge, yet in the process there is always a temptation to take shortcuts for prestige, academic positions, or public recognition. Teddy asserted that such practices are in essence a form of knowledge corruption, as they yield academic products not obtained through a legitimate and honest process. “The world of science is corrupted in a way that is illegitimate and even invalid. Products like this can be extremely dangerous because they are misleading,” he said. He cited the impact of academic misconduct in medicine, where invalid research results could potentially influence medical practice and ultimately endanger patients. To illustrate the seriousness of academic ethics, Teddy recounted several instances of research fraud that shook world-renowned universities, including a study from the 1970s on developing skin tissue in mice, initially hailed as a major breakthrough, which was later proven fraudulent after the black colour on the supposedly transplanted tissue was found to be from a permanent marker. Teddy also mentioned cases of academic integrity violations at prestigious campuses such as the National University of Singapore (NUS), Harvard University, Oxford University, and Tsinghua University, emphasising that those universities nonetheless took decisive action upon discovering violations. He therefore assessed the University of Indonesia’s move to impose ethical sanctions on parties deemed to have violated academic standards as part of the institution’s responsibility in maintaining the integrity of science. The openness shown by UI’s professors, he said, is not merely about one specific case but an effort to uphold the university’s dignity by not allowing ethical violations to pass without correction. Teddy stressed that universities possess independence that must be respected, including in enforcing academic standards and imposing sanctions for violations within the campus environment. Consequently, he asked the Supreme Court justices hearing the cassation case to look beyond procedural and administrative aspects and consider the ethical dimension at the heart of the matter. The cassation appeal was filed after the State Administrative Court (PTUN) granted a lawsuit brought by Bahlil Lahadalia’s dissertation promoters and overturned the ethical sanctions previously imposed by the University of Indonesia. The ruling prompted a response from the UI professoriate, with 301 professors submitting an amicus curiae brief to the Supreme Court in support of UI’s efforts to uphold campus authority in enforcing academic integrity. Teddy expressed hope that the panel of judges would view the case more broadly, as it concerns the future of academic governance and the autonomy of higher education in Indonesia. Bahlil Lahadalia has not yet responded to the ethics ruling or subsequent legal steps, previously stating only that he would follow the process and described the matter as an internal campus affair.